I want to take the city of Brussels to court over one of their most famous landmarks. That city has some wealth so I should be set for life.

Without finding more details other than it is a different engine manufacturer(MAN instead of Wärtsilä) it looks like it is still a giant low speed diesel. The ultra long stroke diesels are very slow engines (the Wärtsilä I mentioned previously had an RPM range of 22 to 102) even in the low speed diesel engine category. I would imagine that it is the standard one-ups-man-ship from the various manufactures since being able to produce one more efficient drives sales to your company until someone beats you out.

Personally I would love to see one of these guys up close in operation after getting to see an old 2 stroke 5 cylinder diesel Fairbanks engine (~13,000 cu in displacement) start and run. It wasn't loud in the traditional sense but was a you felt it in your chest loud as it shook the concrete floor and building. That one was a medium speed engines that ran at like 200 RPM peak and put out ~300 hp but was a pre war engine from a factory.

But that simple solution wouldn't require Bennett's painfully long convoluted opining on the subject with clickbait teaser.

Probably around $200k-250k per year. From what I can tell to maintain my current lifestyle with a similar wage to yours in one of those high expense areas would require that level of pay. I find it hard to believe that I would be able to afford a half acre plot with an ~1900 sq. ft. house with a back yard that backs up a 10 acre city park with playground and woods in any of those areas. This also neglects things like outdoor activities like hunting, fishing, and camping which I do a lot of and unless I am out in the boondocks of NY or CA (not where the high paying jobs are) I doubt I would be able to drive 15 minutes to do those

While they emit a large amount of CO2 they make much better use of their fuel than smaller ships. The correct metric is how many tons of cargo can be moved 1 mile on one gallon of fuel. This is the best way to gauge such things and given that this is suppose to release 50% less CO2 than other ships I would assume it is based off of that metric.

Without knowing exactly what engine it is using but based off of previous engines put in these ships and from the pictures in the article it looks like the engine is one of these but uses 2 8 cylinder ones instead of 1 14 cylinder one. And yes these engines run on heavy fuel oil, aka bunker oil.

I was curious about the engine as well and after looking at the article it appears that they are just using the 8 cylinder version of the engine that they were putting into single engine ships (14 cylinders). Some truly impressive engines.

As far as energy at the muzzle goes a .44 mag is a little bit below that of a 7.62x39mm round, granted the .44 mag is a larger bullet but bleeds energy fast. A .303 packs about 25% more energy than the 7.62x39mm round with a heavier bullet and 7.62 NATO, .30-06, or 7.62x54r all having even more punch. A side arm is really only useful for close encounters with large critters as a last ditch effort.

7.62NATO, .30-06, and 7.62x54r are all considered highly effective rounds against all large game in North America. I wouldn't expect to be taking dangerous African game with them but for big animals like moose, grizzly, and polar bears they will get the job done without issue. Also most of those rounds would have a 180+ grain option hollow or soft point option which is what you would want. I use 7.62x54r 203 grain soft points when hunting and it has not problem going through a decent buck or black bear with a large exit wound.

There are some other rifles that will be kicking around with those old Enfields, although they will all be about the same age and comparable in power. Personally I would take the Finnish M39 (I like Mosin-Nagents) and there would be people who would take the K98s. They all are effective hunting and military weapons and should have no problem with the abuse, although I don't know about the K98s. As far as long serving weapons the Finns are still using rifle build on 100+ year old receivers so those old Mosin-Nagents can't be that bad.

So running a deficit that is ~80% to 95% of the current budget is ok? $200 billion is a lot of money but the federal budgets have been sitting around 4 trillion. Or put another way taking in ~1/2 to 2x the amount of money paid on the interest on the national debt.

Those probably kill the fungi all by themselves.

I think it is this part:

Not really get a warrant and for you to decrypt in all cases. Right now they can only do that provided that you would not be further incriminating your self. The case in question is the In re Boucher case. Here border guards had already seen the portions of the drive's contents . Then there is the later US v. Kischner case that ruled it was a violation of a person's 5th Amendment right to force them to divulge their encryption password to produce evidence that could be used against them in that case. To further muddy the waters there is also the mess that is the US v. Fricosu case where a judge order the defendant to produce the password but a list of probable password was produced by her ex husband so the constitutionality of the order from the judge still remains in question since that issue was bypassed.

IANAL YMMV.
So what we can glean from these 3 cases is:
1. Don't cross a border with your encrypted device on so encrypted material can be seen.
2. Don't piss off your ex
3. Don't be a pedo (why do all cases involving encryption seem to be pedo ones, yes I understand they are easy targets everyone hates) 4. This issue isn't decided and it seems the government doesn't want it resolved.

Short term yes. Long term maybe or maybe not, it depends on if we decide to make crap here again or not.